Find all School-related info fast with the new School-Specific MBA Forum

It is currently 20 Oct 2014, 19:46

Close

GMAT Club Daily Prep

Thank you for using the timer - this advanced tool can estimate your performance and suggest more practice questions. We have subscribed you to Daily Prep Questions via email.

Customized
for You

we will pick new questions that match your level based on your Timer History

Track
Your Progress

every week, we’ll send you an estimated GMAT score based on your performance

Practice
Pays

we will pick new questions that match your level based on your Timer History

Not interested in getting valuable practice questions and articles delivered to your email? No problem, unsubscribe here.

Events & Promotions

Events & Promotions in June
Open Detailed Calendar

In December of 1987 an automobile manufacture pleaded no

  Question banks Downloads My Bookmarks Reviews Important topics  
Author Message
TAGS:
Manager
Manager
User avatar
Joined: 28 Jul 2009
Posts: 156
Followers: 3

Kudos [?]: 44 [0], given: 4

In December of 1987 an automobile manufacture pleaded [#permalink] New post 25 Nov 2009, 01:03
2
This post was
BOOKMARKED
00:00
A
B
C
D
E

Difficulty:

(N/A)

Question Stats:

30% (02:09) correct 70% (01:06) wrong based on 80 sessions
In December of 1987 an automobile manufacture pleaded no contest to criminal charges of odometer tampering and agreed to pay more than $16 million in civil damages for cars that were test-driven with their odometers disconnected
(A) cars that were test-driven with their odometers disconnected
(B) cars that it had test-driven with their disconnected odometers
(C) its cars having been test-driven with disconnected odometers
(D) having test-driven cars with their odometers disconnected
(E) having cars that were test-driven with disconnected odometers
Tuck Thread Master
User avatar
Joined: 20 Aug 2009
Posts: 312
Location: Tbilisi, Georgia
Schools: Stanford (in), Tuck (WL), Wharton (ding), Cornell (in)
Followers: 12

Kudos [?]: 93 [0], given: 69

Re: In December of 1987 an automobile manufacture pleaded [#permalink] New post 25 Nov 2009, 08:33
SC is my weakest area, but I'll try to crack this one :)

"with their odometers disconnected" vs "with disconnected odometers"

It's the matter of concision, not about grammatical mistakes. I consider "with disconnected odometers" better choice. We have 3:2 split and (A), (B), (D) are wrong


(C) vs (E)

(C) its cars having been test-driven with disconnected odometers
(E) having cars that were test-driven with disconnected odometers

And again (E) as it is more concise version, (C) sounds clearly awkward

(E)

Please, provide additional explanations and correct me if I'm wrong
Manager
Manager
User avatar
Joined: 27 May 2009
Posts: 222
Followers: 5

Kudos [?]: 35 [0], given: 2

Re: In December of 1987 an automobile manufacture pleaded [#permalink] New post 25 Nov 2009, 09:22
Same here ........ out of C & E .....

IMO E

Wats the OA?
_________________

I do not suffer from insanity. I enjoy every minute of it.

Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 28 Aug 2009
Posts: 196
Followers: 2

Kudos [?]: 49 [0], given: 1

Re: In December of 1987 an automobile manufacture pleaded [#permalink] New post 25 Nov 2009, 12:04
DRIVE A CAR WITH (DISCONNECTED ODOMETERS)..AS IF DISCONNECTED ODOMETERS IS SOME KIND OF A FEATURE IN A CAR
"WITH THEIR ODOMETERS DISCONNECTED" FAR BETTER CONVEYS THE MEANING CHOICE IS BETWEEN 'A' AND 'D'
WILL GO WITH 'D' BEACUSE 'A' GIVES A FEELING THAT THE CO. HAD LAUNCHED MANY
CARS AND ONLY SOME OF THEM HAD THE ODOS DISCONNECTED AND FOR WHOM
IT HAD TO PAY DAMAGES...WELL IT MIGHT BE TRUE BUT SOMEHOW D IS MORE
GENERIC AND SPECIFIES THE MEANING WITHOUT AMBIGUITIES
D for me
Senior Manager
Senior Manager
avatar
Joined: 29 Jul 2009
Posts: 316
Followers: 4

Kudos [?]: 204 [0], given: 9

Re: In December of 1987 an automobile manufacture pleaded [#permalink] New post 25 Nov 2009, 12:33
shalva wrote:
SC is my weakest area, but I'll try to crack this one :)

"with their odometers disconnected" vs "with disconnected odometers"

It's the matter of concision, not about grammatical mistakes. I consider "with disconnected odometers" better choice. We have 3:2 split and (A), (B), (D) are wrong



Actually I think this works the other way around. The correct option is "with their odometers disconnected". If you say with disconnected odometers it seems as if "disconnected odometers" were a kind of odometers.

I drive during the day,with the lights of my car disconnected
I drive during the day,with the disconnected lights of my car.
Tuck Thread Master
User avatar
Joined: 20 Aug 2009
Posts: 312
Location: Tbilisi, Georgia
Schools: Stanford (in), Tuck (WL), Wharton (ding), Cornell (in)
Followers: 12

Kudos [?]: 93 [0], given: 69

Re: In December of 1987 an automobile manufacture pleaded [#permalink] New post 25 Nov 2009, 13:00
mikeCoolBoy wrote:
Actually I think this works the other way around. The correct option is "with their odometers disconnected". If you say with disconnected odometers it seems as if "disconnected odometers" were a kind of odometers.

I drive during the day,with the lights of my car disconnected
I drive during the day,with the disconnected lights of my car.


Well, as I've already said, I'm not sure.... Though I still prefer "disconnected odometers"

I suppose it all boils down to D vs E....
Senior Manager
Senior Manager
User avatar
Joined: 21 Jul 2009
Posts: 367
Schools: LBS, INSEAD, IMD, ISB - Anything with just 1 yr program.
Followers: 14

Kudos [?]: 101 [0], given: 22

Re: In December of 1987 an automobile manufacture pleaded [#permalink] New post 25 Nov 2009, 16:28
........ | an automobile manufacturer pleaded no contest | ....... | and agreed to pay | ....... | for (is a substitute of because, a conjunction)
A) reasoning is incomplete and inadequately phrased.
B) cars that it had (as if the automobile company only performed) test-driven with their disconnected odometers (as if the cars were driven using disconnected odometers unlike cars with odometers disconnected were driven).
C) both its and having been are totally awkward.
D) correct option.
E) again having is not required.

My answer is D, what's the OA?
_________________

I am AWESOME and it's gonna be LEGENDARY!!!

Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 24 Jun 2009
Posts: 61
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 16 [0], given: 2

Re: In December of 1987 an automobile manufacture pleaded [#permalink] New post 25 Nov 2009, 16:48
bsv180985 wrote:
In December of 1987 an automobile manufacture pleaded no contest to criminal charges of odometer tampering and agreed to pay more than $16 million in civil damages for cars that were test-driven with their odometers disconnected
(A) cars that were test-driven with their odometers disconnected
(B) cars that it had test-driven with their disconnected odometers
(C) its cars having been test-driven with disconnected odometers
(D) having test-driven cars with their odometers disconnected
(E) having cars that were test-driven with disconnected odometers


E suggests that the company just HAD cars that were driven with disconnected odometers. D suggests that THE COMPANY TEST DROVE THEM with the odometers disconnected. I think D is correct - it makes more sense that the company gets charged for doing the test driving rather than just possessing the cars.
Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 19 Nov 2007
Posts: 228
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 92 [0], given: 1

Re: In December of 1987 an automobile manufacture pleaded [#permalink] New post 25 Nov 2009, 23:57
(A) cars that were test-driven with their odometers disconnected
- IMO the correct answer. The author probably wants to convey that the automobile manufacture is criminally charged for selling (implied in the sentence) cars that were test-driven with car’s odometer disconnected.

(B) cars that it had test-driven with their disconnected odometers.
-“it” is not required here. Hence Incorrect

(C) its cars having been test-driven with disconnected odometers
-“its” is not required here and ,moreover, the sentence is passive. Hence Incorrect

(D) having test-driven cars with their odometers disconnected
Nobody is criminally charged for having cars. So this doesn’t make sense to me. Hence Incorrect

(E) having cars that were test-driven with disconnected odometers
-Nobody is criminally charged for having cars. So this doesn’t make sense to me. Hence Incorrect
Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 29 Jun 2009
Posts: 52
Followers: 0

Kudos [?]: 8 [0], given: 4

Re: In December of 1987 an automobile manufacture pleaded [#permalink] New post 26 Nov 2009, 01:54
IMO D.. 'Having' is required otherwise it doesn't make much sense.
'with their odometers disconnected ' is better than'disconnected odometers'.
Intern
Intern
avatar
Joined: 20 Oct 2009
Posts: 40
Followers: 0

Kudos [?]: 7 [0], given: 0

Re: In December of 1987 an automobile manufacture pleaded [#permalink] New post 28 Nov 2009, 08:17
bsv180985 wrote:
In December of 1987 an automobile manufacture pleaded no contest to criminal charges of odometer tampering and agreed to pay more than $16 million in civil damages for cars that were test-driven with their odometers disconnected
(A) cars that were test-driven with their odometers disconnected
(B) cars that it had test-driven with their disconnected odometers
(C) its cars having been test-driven with disconnected odometers
(D) having test-driven cars with their odometers disconnected
(E) having cars that were test-driven with disconnected odometers


I honestly believe that the answer here should be B. We need the past perfect to indicate an action occured before another event in the past. the test drive took place before the automobile manufacture pleaded no contest to criminal charges. other answer choices made it look like the test drive took place simultaniously with the pleading

Last edited by GMATFIGHTER on 29 Nov 2009, 01:09, edited 1 time in total.
Intern
Intern
avatar
Joined: 20 Oct 2009
Posts: 40
Followers: 0

Kudos [?]: 7 [0], given: 0

Re: In December of 1987 an automobile manufacture pleaded [#permalink] New post 29 Nov 2009, 01:18
I actually just remembered an important point leading me to agree that the answer here should be D. The construction "having + past participle" also indicates an action in the past before the main verb of the sentence. The main verbs of this sentence are "pleaded" and "agreed", so "having test driven" took place before the "pleaded." Another mistake I made with option B is that "that" would imply that there are other cars that the manufacturer didn't test drive. We don't know whether the manufacturer test drove most of these cars or a small number of them. I think it would make sense that he's in court because he did a mistake when he test drove ALL the cars. So option D says "having test driven cars" implies that we're talking about all the cars that he had were tested.

another mistake I've picked up from option B is that it has the "it." I believe there could be a typo in the question because I think it should be "manufacturer" rather than "manufacture." the company itself can plead in court, but it's rather a person who can do that, so the "it" in option B is simply wrong.
Senior Manager
Senior Manager
avatar
Joined: 18 Aug 2009
Posts: 437
Schools: UT at Austin, Indiana State University, UC at Berkeley
WE 1: 5.5
WE 2: 5.5
WE 3: 6.0
Followers: 6

Kudos [?]: 52 [0], given: 16

Re: In December of 1987 an automobile manufacture pleaded [#permalink] New post 04 Jan 2010, 22:16
What is OA, will be waiting for clear elaborate OE.
_________________

Never give up,,,

Manager
Manager
User avatar
Joined: 19 Jan 2009
Posts: 74
Followers: 2

Kudos [?]: 21 [0], given: 2

Re: In December of 1987 an automobile manufacture pleaded [#permalink] New post 05 Jan 2010, 00:52
OA - D.

They've paid for HAVING TEST DRIVEN CARS,
not for cars or for having cars.
Intern
Intern
avatar
Joined: 05 Jan 2010
Posts: 4
Followers: 0

Kudos [?]: 0 [0], given: 0

Re: In December of 1987 an automobile manufacture pleaded [#permalink] New post 05 Jan 2010, 08:17
Hi,my first post in the club :-D
My 2 cents on the sc:

In December of 1987 an automobile manufacture pleaded no contest to criminal charges of odometer tampering and agreed to pay more than $16 million in civil damages for cars that were test-driven with their odometers disconnected
(A) cars that were test-driven with their odometers disconnected
(B) cars that it had test-driven with their disconnected odometers
(C) its cars having been test-driven with disconnected odometers
(D) having test-driven cars with their odometers disconnected
(E) having cars that were test-driven with disconnected odometers

D is also wrong as i feel their opens confusion here, so ANS shud be E
Intern
Intern
avatar
Joined: 30 Sep 2009
Posts: 17
Followers: 0

Kudos [?]: 4 [0], given: 0

Re: In December of 1987 an automobile manufacture pleaded [#permalink] New post 23 Feb 2010, 02:09
Here is my reasoning.

In December of 1987 an automobile manufacturer
pleaded no contest to criminal charges of odometer
tampering and agreed to pay more than $16 million
in civil damages for cars that were test-driven with
their odometers disconnected


(A) cars that were test-driven with their odometers
disconnected -> Sounds like manufacturer pays 16M for the cars
(B) cars that it had test-driven with their disconnected
odometers -> Sounds like manufacturer pays 16M for the cars
(C) its cars having been test-driven with disconnected
odometers -> Sounds like manufacturer pays 16M for its cars

We are left with D and E
(D) having test-driven cars with their odometers
disconnected
(E) having cars that were test-driven with disconnected
odometers

I choose D as it is more direct to convey the idea that Manufacturer is fined because of his action of test-driving the cars without the device on.

Please comment
SVP
SVP
avatar
Joined: 17 Feb 2010
Posts: 1560
Followers: 12

Kudos [?]: 224 [0], given: 6

Re: In December of 1987 an automobile manufacture pleaded [#permalink] New post 30 Jun 2010, 19:15
can anyone explain why C is incorrect?
Intern
Intern
avatar
Joined: 29 Jul 2010
Posts: 46
Followers: 0

Kudos [?]: 3 [0], given: 1

Re: In December of 1987 an automobile manufacture pleaded [#permalink] New post 13 Sep 2010, 07:20
(A) cars that were test-driven with their odometers disconnected - the auto manufacturer agreed to pay not for cars..but for driving the cars with odometer disconnected
(B) cars that it had test-driven with their disconnected odometers - it and the Error remains
(C) its cars having been test-driven with disconnected odometers -its
(D) having test-driven cars with their odometers disconnected - correct.
(E) having cars that were test-driven with disconnected odometers - Same as with A
Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 07 Aug 2010
Posts: 85
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 16 [0], given: 9

GMAT ToolKit User
Re: In December of 1987 an automobile manufacture pleaded [#permalink] New post 03 Oct 2010, 20:40
D :lol:
Expert Post
1 KUDOS received
e-GMAT Representative
User avatar
Joined: 02 Nov 2011
Posts: 1794
Followers: 1298

Kudos [?]: 3662 [1] , given: 185

Re: In December of 1987 an automobile manufacture pleaded no [#permalink] New post 22 Jan 2013, 09:18
1
This post received
KUDOS
Expert's post
Hi All,

In December of 1987 an automobile manufacture pleaded no contest to criminal charges of odometer tampering and agreed to pay more than $16 million in civil damages for cars that were test-driven with their odometers disconnected.

Image

Understanding the intended meaning of the sentence is the key to get to the correct answer choice. The automobile manufacturer agreed to pay the fine for its action. It agreed to pay for the action of test-driving the cars which had their odometers disconnected.

Image

Per the original choice, the auto manufacturers agreed to pay fine for the cars and not for their action. This distorts the intended meaning of the sentence.

PoE:

(A) cars that were test-driven with their odometers disconnected: Incorrect for the reason stated above.

(B) cars that it had test-driven with their disconnected odometers: Incorrect. Same error as in choice A.

(C) its cars having been test-driven with disconnected odometers: Incorrect. Same error as in choice A.

(D) having test-driven cars with their odometers disconnected: Correct. This choice correctly conveys the action for which the auto manufacturers agreed to pay the fine.

(E) having cars that were test-driven with disconnected odometers: Incorrect. Per this choice, the auto manufacturers agreed to pay the fine for “having cars”. This is not the intended meaning.

Hope this helps. :)
Thanks.
Shraddha
_________________

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WeT9_Wr0DlI&feature=youtu.be

Re: In December of 1987 an automobile manufacture pleaded no   [#permalink] 22 Jan 2013, 09:18
    Similar topics Author Replies Last post
Similar
Topics:
In December of 1987 an automobile manufacturer pleaded no nitinneha 19 10 Apr 2007, 14:34
In December of 1987 an automobile manufacturer pleaded no myc2004 2 24 Apr 2006, 08:41
In December of 1987 an automobile manufacturer pleaded no amy_v 6 24 Nov 2005, 11:48
In December of 1987 an automobile manufacturer pleaded no rahuluec 6 02 Nov 2005, 18:41
In December of 1987 an automobile manufacturer pleaded no nakib77 4 01 Nov 2005, 13:12
Display posts from previous: Sort by

In December of 1987 an automobile manufacture pleaded no

  Question banks Downloads My Bookmarks Reviews Important topics  


cron

GMAT Club MBA Forum Home| About| Privacy Policy| Terms and Conditions| GMAT Club Rules| Contact| Sitemap

Powered by phpBB © phpBB Group and phpBB SEO

Kindly note that the GMAT® test is a registered trademark of the Graduate Management Admission Council®, and this site has neither been reviewed nor endorsed by GMAC®.